Climate models don't even project 10 years into the future well, they work more on 30 year time scales.
So do those from 1984 do a better job than those form 2004 when it comes to matching what we observe to be the case now? No matter how each group of models compare with the other how well do they do in absolute terms?
What about the people with stake in large multinational wind and solar producers claiming we can save ourself with all-renewable society?
Where things start getting really daft is that using wind and solar can easily mean that you need to run fossil fuel plants very inefficiently in order to "balance the grid". Thus it's possible for these to have a huge "carbon footprint". Yet nuclear power tends to be dismissed out of hand by the same people demanding "something must be done". Similarly it's quite easy to produce "bio fuels" which require more petroleum than "petrol fuels".
There is a very real issue of toxic pollution that gets ignored in the hype over CO2.
A lot of environmental issues tend to get ignored here. Possibly including those which actually have a far greater influence on weather and climate systems.
So, you tell me, is the natural balance of emissions and absorption so precariously balanced that a couple of percentage points will result in catastrophe? Inquiring minds want to know!
If this is the case how can the Earth's climate remained stable for 4+ billion years? Alternativly what can have happened recently, but pre "industrial revolution" to have made it unstable now?
By the way, the answer I get is never supported by anything other than computer models. I know just enough about how computer models are like graphs - you draw the graph you want then plot the points.
Just about all of the climate computer "models" would be better described as "fiction".
Since it's most probably a russian missile, this proves that they have a self-destruct mode that can be activated before they could hit their target.
This implies that the plane shot down by a russian missile in Ukraine was destroyed on purpose, since the missile could have exploded before hitting its target.
The capabilities of thus unknown, but most likely sea or air launched, missile tell you nothing about those of an SA-12. It also gives no indication if whoever shot MH17 down knew that it was a neutral civilian airliner. Especially since it turns out to be the case that knowing what you are shooting at is one of the most difficult parts of using such a SAM system. (Even more so if all you have is the TELAR.)
That's great, and I use these sites all the time. BUT, the majority of flyers are casual leisure passengers. They are unlikely to figure out which of the dozen 757 configurations Delta offers they are flying on.
Unless the airline starts putting aircraft registration numbers on the bookings you'd need to also check out something like FlightAware to see which planes usually fly the routes in question. IIRC the most obvious example of an airline with a large fleet of identical aircraft has non reclining seats anyway.
I immediately thought of the 1st episode of the reboot of Battlestar Galactica, where 99.9% of their modern military force was rendered inoperable. No. Thank. You.
The author may have been more thinking of "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan". Yet oddly the concept is not mentioned in "TOS: The Ultimate Computer".
Except in most jurisdictions police have immunity from prosecution for crimes they commit while on duty. That's how they can kick the door to a house down, gun everyone down, then shrug their shoulders and say "oops, we misread the address on the warrant." and walk away free of any responsibility for just having murdered an entire family.
With it working rather differently if the family sucessfully defend themselves against the "burglars".
Man? Have you ever dated?? Women are the single most argumentative, must be right, cant change their minds, NEEDS AN APOLOGY EVEN WHEN PROVEN WRONG group out their.
Even if this were true it's a non sequitur. Wikipedia "edit wars" are not (hetero) dates. Apart from both involving people they don't have much in common at all.
That's not the argument that was made. It's not "worse" that some fields are dominated by women, but it is fact. The argument is that a concerted push to end sexism *just for women* is itself sexist. The motivation of these programs to end sexism is called into question since they are sexist themselves.
As well as unlikely to be effective. Mandating discrimination to end discrimination is something only a politician could have come up with. It's even possible for such programs to end up being to the disadvantage of those they are supposedly intended to "help".
Wikipedia is all about (1) information about the world, and (2) a neutral perspective on that information.
You are unlikely to get a "neutral perspective" anyway. Especially not with something which has any "political" dimension. Someone who does not know a topic may not realise that they could be getting something which is very one sided.
Why must everything be gender balanced? Why not let women do what they want instead of trying to force them in to places that aren't necessarily their thing?
It would also be kind of ironic if the efforts to "gender balance" were partially responsible for the "problem" too.
I'm just still trying to keep up.
Is this week...
a) "women are as tough as men and can do anything men can do, and need no special favors because those deprecate her strength" or
Possibly even more interesting would be WHO is advocating these positions. Of course in politics it's perfectly possible for there to be "doublethink".
It only proves her point if you are intellectually lazy enough to believe that her only detractors are trolls. There are plenty of rational reasons to critisize here. Have people already forgotten about her receiving 180000$, then publishing videos made with footage almost 100% taken from other youtubers, without any attribution?
Since the "trolls" will tend to draw attention away from the failings of the "research" the question of "cui bono" needs to be addressed.
The sad thing is that a lot of serious trolls aren't 13 year olds. They're 40 year olds, with kids and wives who you think would have some brains, but sadly still seem to get off on just being miserable pricks.
Unless they are identified nobody can know who they are. They may not always be who they are assumed to be. There have even been cases of "auto trolling"...
That person then found one quickly and installed it, without checking what it actually filters (although filtering companies do make that tough).
It also appears to be fairly common for such companies to not be exactly honest about their filtering criteria either. Especially when it comes to anything "political".
Industry math? 700k downloads does not equal 700k movie tickets or DVD purchases or rentals. Some significant portion of that number would never have bought the movie, whether available for download or not. Regardless of your views on criminal/violent punishment for non-violent IP crimes (I disagree on that level personally), basing any punishment on a false metric is the worst kind of injustice.
There there is also the third catagory those people who would have bought the DVD only because of the seeing the download. This is the number that could meaningfully be compared with "lost sales". Even if "were never a potential customer" covers the vast majority of downloaders.
If this paper were to turn out to be correct, current climate models are useless and will need to be completely reworked. Well, maybe not completely. Some more than others. But it would contradict some of the fundamental assumptions of most of those models.
We already know that these models useless at predicting. Which rather implies that ALL of them have at least one fundermentally wrong assumption. How many truely independent models exist anyway?
Since 2000 there's been an unusual number of La Nina years.
We don't have enough observations to ever begin to know what is "usual" in the first place.
Under normal circumstances, this should have produced a noticeably cool period, similar to the 1940s and 1890s. Instead the decade was still the warmest on record.
Even the longest records we have may well be a few orders of magnitude too short to be of much use here. That's before even considering issues of accuracy, when can even apply to records being currently collected.
I also wonder will they prosecute any of the newspapers that showed images from the video? I don't know of any news channels that broadcast the clip, but there might be one of those somewhere too.
Of course just telling people about the video means that it's possible to go looking for it. Probably be of far more use to strip anyone who wants to join a foreign military/paramilitary of their citizenship. After they leave, of course.
The Exxon Valdez spill killed (from my quick search) an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 birds, about what this would kill in 10 years or so at mid-20k birds killed per year. So, build 10 of these plants (or larger with even more roasting capacity) and you have the equivalent (in bird deaths) of an Exxon Valdez oil spill each year. A wise sage once said "It's not easy being green."
The Exxon Valdez is something which should not have happened at all. Whereas this is a consequence of "normal operation".
Also.... shitty Lync server checks for user agent like websites used to in the '90 and not all SIP clients know how to lie tot the server that they are Lync and not Pidgin, Empathy etc.
There still appears to be plenty of webservers trying to interpret user agent strings. Which, ironically, can cause issues with the latest versions of MSIE.
People don't want to learn any more than the bare necessity to do their job. If LibreOffice is quite capable of doing what they want, but the menu/button layout is slightly different or some techniques are different between it and MS Office, they'll be less inclined to learn and stick with what they've always known. Which is fine, except that people aren't honest about this being the reason.
But somehow changes between different versions of MS Office don't get this kind of response.
Slashdot Mirror
Climate models don't even project 10 years into the future well, they work more on 30 year time scales.
So do those from 1984 do a better job than those form 2004 when it comes to matching what we observe to be the case now? No matter how each group of models compare with the other how well do they do in absolute terms?
What about the people with stake in large multinational wind and solar producers claiming we can save ourself with all-renewable society?
Where things start getting really daft is that using wind and solar can easily mean that you need to run fossil fuel plants very inefficiently in order to "balance the grid". Thus it's possible for these to have a huge "carbon footprint". Yet nuclear power tends to be dismissed out of hand by the same people demanding "something must be done".
Similarly it's quite easy to produce "bio fuels" which require more petroleum than "petrol fuels".
There is a very real issue of toxic pollution that gets ignored in the hype over CO2.
A lot of environmental issues tend to get ignored here. Possibly including those which actually have a far greater influence on weather and climate systems.
So, you tell me, is the natural balance of emissions and absorption so precariously balanced that a couple of percentage points will result in catastrophe? Inquiring minds want to know!
If this is the case how can the Earth's climate remained stable for 4+ billion years? Alternativly what can have happened recently, but pre "industrial revolution" to have made it unstable now?
By the way, the answer I get is never supported by anything other than computer models. I know just enough about how computer models are like graphs - you draw the graph you want then plot the points.
Just about all of the climate computer "models" would be better described as "fiction".
Since it's most probably a russian missile, this proves that they have a self-destruct mode that can be activated before they could hit their target.
This implies that the plane shot down by a russian missile in Ukraine was destroyed on purpose, since the missile could have exploded before hitting its target.
The capabilities of thus unknown, but most likely sea or air launched, missile tell you nothing about those of an SA-12.
It also gives no indication if whoever shot MH17 down knew that it was a neutral civilian airliner. Especially since it turns out to be the case that knowing what you are shooting at is one of the most difficult parts of using such a SAM system. (Even more so if all you have is the TELAR.)
That's great, and I use these sites all the time. BUT, the majority of flyers are casual leisure passengers. They are unlikely to figure out which of the dozen 757 configurations Delta offers they are flying on.
Unless the airline starts putting aircraft registration numbers on the bookings you'd need to also check out something like FlightAware to see which planes usually fly the routes in question.
IIRC the most obvious example of an airline with a large fleet of identical aircraft has non reclining seats anyway.
I immediately thought of the 1st episode of the reboot of Battlestar Galactica, where 99.9% of their modern military force was rendered inoperable. No. Thank. You.
The author may have been more thinking of "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan". Yet oddly the concept is not mentioned in "TOS: The Ultimate Computer".
Except in most jurisdictions police have immunity from prosecution for crimes they commit while on duty. That's how they can kick the door to a house down, gun everyone down, then shrug their shoulders and say "oops, we misread the address on the warrant." and walk away free of any responsibility for just having murdered an entire family.
With it working rather differently if the family sucessfully defend themselves against the "burglars".
Man? Have you ever dated?? Women are the single most argumentative, must be right, cant change their minds, NEEDS AN APOLOGY EVEN WHEN PROVEN WRONG group out their.
Even if this were true it's a non sequitur. Wikipedia "edit wars" are not (hetero) dates.
Apart from both involving people they don't have much in common at all.
That's not the argument that was made. It's not "worse" that some fields are dominated by women, but it is fact. The argument is that a concerted push to end sexism *just for women* is itself sexist. The motivation of these programs to end sexism is called into question since they are sexist themselves.
As well as unlikely to be effective. Mandating discrimination to end discrimination is something only a politician could have come up with. It's even possible for such programs to end up being to the disadvantage of those they are supposedly intended to "help".
Wikipedia is all about (1) information about the world, and (2) a neutral perspective on that information.
You are unlikely to get a "neutral perspective" anyway. Especially not with something which has any "political" dimension.
Someone who does not know a topic may not realise that they could be getting something which is very one sided.
Why must everything be gender balanced? Why not let women do what they want instead of trying to force them in to places that aren't necessarily their thing?
It would also be kind of ironic if the efforts to "gender balance" were partially responsible for the "problem" too.
I'm just still trying to keep up.
Is this week...
a) "women are as tough as men and can do anything men can do, and need no special favors because those deprecate her strength" or
Possibly even more interesting would be WHO is advocating these positions. Of course in politics it's perfectly possible for there to be "doublethink".
It only proves her point if you are intellectually lazy enough to believe that her only detractors are trolls. There are plenty of rational reasons to critisize here. Have people already forgotten about her receiving 180000$, then publishing videos made with footage almost 100% taken from other youtubers, without any attribution?
Since the "trolls" will tend to draw attention away from the failings of the "research" the question of "cui bono" needs to be addressed.
The sad thing is that a lot of serious trolls aren't 13 year olds. They're 40 year olds, with kids and wives who you think would have some brains, but sadly still seem to get off on just being miserable pricks.
Unless they are identified nobody can know who they are.
They may not always be who they are assumed to be. There have even been cases of "auto trolling"...
That person then found one quickly and installed it, without checking what it actually filters (although filtering companies do make that tough).
It also appears to be fairly common for such companies to not be exactly honest about their filtering criteria either. Especially when it comes to anything "political".
Industry math? 700k downloads does not equal 700k movie tickets or DVD purchases or rentals. Some significant portion of that number would never have bought the movie, whether available for download or not. Regardless of your views on criminal/violent punishment for non-violent IP crimes (I disagree on that level personally), basing any punishment on a false metric is the worst kind of injustice.
There there is also the third catagory those people who would have bought the DVD only because of the seeing the download. This is the number that could meaningfully be compared with "lost sales". Even if "were never a potential customer" covers the vast majority of downloaders.
If this paper were to turn out to be correct, current climate models are useless and will need to be completely reworked. Well, maybe not completely. Some more than others. But it would contradict some of the fundamental assumptions of most of those models.
We already know that these models useless at predicting. Which rather implies that ALL of them have at least one fundermentally wrong assumption.
How many truely independent models exist anyway?
Since 2000 there's been an unusual number of La Nina years.
We don't have enough observations to ever begin to know what is "usual" in the first place.
Under normal circumstances, this should have produced a noticeably cool period, similar to the 1940s and 1890s. Instead the decade was still the warmest on record.
Even the longest records we have may well be a few orders of magnitude too short to be of much use here. That's before even considering issues of accuracy, when can even apply to records being currently collected.
I also wonder will they prosecute any of the newspapers that showed images from the video? I don't know of any news channels that broadcast the clip, but there might be one of those somewhere too.
Of course just telling people about the video means that it's possible to go looking for it.
Probably be of far more use to strip anyone who wants to join a foreign military/paramilitary of their citizenship. After they leave, of course.
The Exxon Valdez spill killed (from my quick search) an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 birds, about what this would kill in 10 years or so at mid-20k birds killed per year. So, build 10 of these plants (or larger with even more roasting capacity) and you have the equivalent (in bird deaths) of an Exxon Valdez oil spill each year. A wise sage once said "It's not easy being green."
The Exxon Valdez is something which should not have happened at all. Whereas this is a consequence of "normal operation".
Also.... shitty Lync server checks for user agent like websites used to in the '90 and not all SIP clients know how to lie tot the server that they are Lync and not Pidgin, Empathy etc.
There still appears to be plenty of webservers trying to interpret user agent strings. Which, ironically, can cause issues with the latest versions of MSIE.
People don't want to learn any more than the bare necessity to do their job. If LibreOffice is quite capable of doing what they want, but the menu/button layout is slightly different or some techniques are different between it and MS Office, they'll be less inclined to learn and stick with what they've always known. Which is fine, except that people aren't honest about this being the reason.
But somehow changes between different versions of MS Office don't get this kind of response.
I vote they change Winders to Mundungus Fletcher, from the Harry Potter books. He's a thief and has the handy nickname of Dung.
Why not go the whole hog and call it "Tommy Riddle"?
Reactors are even more critical than aircraft. If a commercial airliner goes down, 300 people die. If a reactor blows up, you've got Chernobyl.
Comparing Chernobyl to MH17 or Fukushima to JAL123 dosn't really support that conclusion though.